A move to nikon...

rupek · #1 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 04:20 PM

I am looking at moving to a nikon system,

i am interested in either the d90 or the d300s. I am also requiring a lens or two.

I shoot wildlife predominantly, with the occasional landscape shot. The other thing is that i have a baby on the way, so i am going to be photographing that a lot very soon. So some indoor shots will be required.

Currently i am liking the look of the sigma 100-300mm, i have shot with a 70-200 and sometime feel i want a bit more reach, the thinking is this lens would also do for some wildlife with a teleconverter attached.

My question is if you had £2000 to spend, what would you buy.

When i have worked it out, best for budget would be the d90, with the 100-300, maybe get the kit lens or something similar and a maybe flash for indoor use.

Although the d300 does appeal with the faster fps. However with the 100-300 this would be my entire budget gone. And leave nothing for the shorter zooms.

Does anyone have any other recommendations? I don't really mind what brand of lens, but i do want one of those 2 bodies really,

Any help anyone can give would be much appreciated.

rupek · #2 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 05:21 PM

I could get nikon d300s, 18-200 plus a flash for in my budget, although that does leave me lacking at the long end. I could add a long lens a a later date.

eeyore · #3 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 05:43 PM

what are you moving from ? - if its canon (or other DSLR system for that matter) I wouldn't bother unless you can afford the D700 or D3 , the advantages such as high iso performance arent that noticeable at the lower end of the system

personally i'd say that unless you can afford the pro bodies (which you cant with 2k) you'd be better off keeping your existing system and spending the 2k on some decent long, wide, or macro glass

BillyPilgrim · #4 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 06:33 PM

I'd also have to ask what you're moving from?

If it is a decent dslr then I'd stick with it and spend the cash on some professional lenses.

Geoff F · #5 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 06:34 PM

Well, I became 'canon fodder' a few years ago so can't really comment on the current Nikon bodies.

However, my thoughts about any new camera system would be; forget about fps unless you are a pro journalist or have a specific need for this function, which I never use. Don't get into the pixels arms race either, 8m is ample unless you are going to be regularly printing high quality prints at A3 size.

Most important is to get a camera which is strongly built and feels right in your hands; and has easy to see and reach controls. That is why I always advise Canon users to try the 40D/50D instead of the slightly cheaper 400D/450D unless they specifically need a light weight camera.

Do you need a camera with video option? For me it would be a waste of money, but it is considered essential by some people.

With regard to lenses. If you are going to be taking baby photos then I would consider a zoom which can go down to around 18 mm, or 28 mm at least. Wildlife lenses depend on exactly what you intend to photograph. 300 mm is fine for a general purpose lens but for smaller birds etc I find that 400 mm is usually a bit on the small side. Currently I use a Sigma 150-500 which is mostly at 500 mm and is frequently still a bit small.

Whether you decide to use third party lenses depends on the individual lens; some are good value but I can't think of any camera brand lens which is worse quality than the third party alternative. Kit lenses can be a good option but there is a risk that you are getting a lens which isn't the best for your needs so it may work out better to buy the body and lenses separately.

And if you will be taking indoor general/baby shots I would suggest a proper external flash unit which will help to avoid those red eye problems.

But come back for more specific advice when you have finally decided on the body and know how much more you can afford to spend.

marvin · #6 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 07:48 PM

hi

well, with the information you've provided you could get the d90 with 18-105mm vr @ £750ish. sigma 50-500mm @ £1050ish. £200ish to spare for a flashgun or the dx 35mm f1.8 or tamron 90mm macro as a little treat

.

for what you say you are going to use the camera for i'm not sure you'll get much more from the d300 and you will certainly benefit from spending more on the lenses.

the 18-200mm looks very versatile but the 18-105mm should give you enough for general use and its so much cheaper...the d90 with 18-200 @ £1060 - are you going to get £300 worth out of it when you'll have to get a longer lens anyway?

anyway, £2k to spend on photography equipment...it does present its dilemmas but it's not a bad problem to have

.

good luck whatever you choose to do.

tim

forgot to say...congratulations on the baby!

DrNickBurton · #7 (**permalink**) 26-12-2009, 10:56 PM

I have to say I'm a bit envious - it's a really exciting time starting out, and you've got a pretty healthy budget!

The Sigma 100-300mm is an excellent choice. I've used this lens alot recently, and I'm really pleased with the results - it's sharp and contrasty, with swift and quiet autofocusing. It's a bit short for some wildlife though (birds, small/distant mammals), so I'd recomend also investing in a 1.4 teleconverter. Even with a teleconverter fitted, this lens kicks lenses like the Sigma 150-500mm into touch. There's an informative review of this lens on photozone - well worth a look if you haven't read it yet.

Agreed that the D90 is a better bet than the D300 given your budget. In fact, how about going one step further and getting a D5000, which has the same great sensor for about £200 less?

The Nikon mid-range consumer zooms (18-XXmm) are pretty average (similarly, I'd avoid the 18-200mm). For this reason, this is an area where a lot of people go 3rd party. You could take a look at the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, which is a popular alternative. For use with a D5000, make sure it's the most recent version, which has an internal focus motor. On a D90, any version will do.

So, if it were me, I'd go for:
D5000 £430
Sigma 100-300mm f/4 £800
Sigma 1.4TC £190
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 £330
Nikon SB-600 £200

Total £1950 (I got these prices from camera price buster)

Leaving £50 for a camera bag and a couple of memory cards!

RichBrew · #8 (**permalink**) 27-12-2009, 06:55 AM

Dr Nick has provided you with a list of sensible options, but I would like to add one more suggestion: the 50mm f/1.8 D AF Nikkor. This often overlooked lens is an ideal focal length for portraits on the DX format; it's fast, so useful for indoor shots; very sharp from f/5.6 and costs (currently) £103. An absolute bargain Nikkor.

RichBrew

DrNickBurton · #9 (**permalink**) 27-12-2009, 08:54 AM

I second that - this is probably the best value lens of them all!

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichBrew

Dr Nick has provided you with a list of sensible options, but I would like to add one more suggestion: the 50mm f/1.8 D AF Nikkor. This often overlooked lens is an ideal focal length for portraits on the DX format; it's fast, so useful for indoor shots; very sharp from f/5.6 and costs (currently) £103. An absolute bargain Nikkor.

RichBrew